Opinion
June 16, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.).
Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Special Term acted properly in issuing the instant discovery order. LILCO's arguments concerning the admissibility of such evidence at trial are premature. The rules governing disclosure differ from those concerning admissibility, and questions of admissibility are to be reserved for the trial court (see, McKinney v. State of New York, 111 Misc.2d 382, 387; Siegel, NY Prac § 344). Moreover, "[t]here shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action" (see, CPLR 3101 [a]). Since the information sought by the plaintiff is material and relevant, it should be disclosed. Finally, we note that LILCO has failed to meet its burden of establishing that the information sought to be disclosed is privileged (see, Yannick v. Tube City Iron Metal Co., 77 A.D.2d 623). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.